>>>v1.1+ Feedback<<<(Latest Update: v1.2.9R)

[Kiknurazz91]

Update ETA?

[Panzergraf]

Unwanted alliances through the "common enemy" thing at the start of a turn is still ruining things. Especially when an enemy suddenly becomes an ally while you have several naval invasions going on against them.

These things really need to be subject to player control. Even if it might be ahistorical or "game-y" to let an admiral make geopolitical decisions like that, it is still a game and this is a major cause of frustration.

(And there's certainly nothing realistic about how things work right now)

[Zuikaku]

Hey, @Nick Thomadis any chance you could remove tracer and trail effect from the shells to make them less visible or hardly visible at all? Battles tend to look somewhat awkward with all these "catapult flame shots" flying all around. And I believe that coul'd increase the performance during the battles.

[Ribba]

3 hours ago, Zuikaku said:

Hey, @Nick Thomadis any chance you could remove tracer and trail effect from the shells to make them less visible or hardly visible at all? Battles tend to look somewhat awkward with all these "catapult flame shots" flying all around. And I believe that coul'd increase the performance during the battles.

I hope it's not removed, since it looks good and gives the player better situational awareness on which of the players ships the AI have targeted. But if it's something that is performance draining, it should be an option to turn it on/off.

[Zuikaku]

It would be far more realistic if you don't se trajectory of every single shell... And no, it does not look good, it's like Star wars or Ben Hur naval battle.

[madham82]

56 minutes ago, Zuikaku said:

It would be far more realistic if you don't se trajectory of every single shell... And no, it does not look good, it's like Star wars or Ben Hur naval battle.

We also get HP/Flooding bars, damage counters, and a host of other unrealistic GUI features because.....it is a game.. 

[Zuikaku]

OK, it is just minor thing, I can live with that if you consider this to be good feature.

[Grandpa Canuck]

We need a way to know our relations with minor nations.

We can influence our position with major nations but not the minor ones.

We need a system to affect this more. Doing so should affect the major nations that minor has good relations with as well as our reputation and unrest overall.

I also agree we should be able to use our prestige to have more effect on all diplomatic items. If the campaign game is to run the navy this needs to be a political game as well as a naval ship building and battle game. A system when we can use small, medium & large cost to prestige affecting political choices would be nice.

[kineuhansen]

i just had an old bug return where my battleship did not move in ´my first battle i had with us it was in a mutible nation battle the guns still worked but the ship did not move my allied dd and cl did moved and when i left the battle in loading the game just freeze

 

[MDHansen]

1 hour ago, madham82 said:

We also get HP/Flooding bars, damage counters, and a host of other unrealistic GUI features because.....it is a game.. 

 

1 hour ago, Zuikaku said:

OK, it is just minor thing, I can live with that if you consider this to be good feature.

Regards to this. I would really like an on/off command for this. I really don't like the RPG style damage numbers for 3 reasons; it doesn't look good, it clutters the UI, and finally, all those numbers are in the lower left column anyway.

The projectile tracers could maybe also have a separate command to turn on/off. I don't mind them too much, but in some occations it would be nice to turn off (BIG fleet battles)

Edited April 12, 2023 by MDHansen

[MDHansen]

1 hour ago, Grandpa Canuck said:

We need a way to know our relations with minor nations.

We can influence our position with major nations but not the minor ones.

We need a system to affect this more. Doing so should affect the major nations that minor has good relations with as well as our reputation and unrest overall.

I also agree we should be able to use our prestige to have more effect on all diplomatic items. If the campaign game is to run the navy this needs to be a political game as well as a naval ship building and battle game. A system when we can use small, medium & large cost to prestige affecting political choices would be nice.

Fully agree. I also would like to be able to "suggest" to a minor faction what they can buy/build. Say I make a few cheaper builds and mark them for sale (checkbox)

[Suribachi]

1 minute ago, MDHansen said:

 

Regards to this. I would really like an on/off command for this. I really don't like the RPG style damage numbers for 3 reasons; it doesn't look good, it clutters the UI, and finally, all those numbers are in the lower left column anyway.

The projectile tracers could maybe also have a separate command to turn on/off. I don't mind them too much, but in some occasions it would be nice to turn off (BIG fleet battles)

I agree with this.  Especially in larger battles, players can suffer from information overload.  As a result, time critical information that may otherwise be missed, like a torpedo launch.

If we had a toggle to de-clutter the UI of non-critical information on the fly, that would greatly help.  As an example, the log in the lower left of the screen has different levels of what information is displayed.  A similar toggle for information in other areas of the screen would be greatly appreciated.

A few examples I can think of:
 

• Upper Right Damage Log:  default (what is currently shown), superstructure only, hull only, modules only
  Reasoning for this: the damage log is extremely difficult to read.  As an example, if the hull underneath a turret is damaged, it is nearly impossible to see if the turret is still functional due to how the damage log layers the damaged colors over the ship's blueprint.
• Upper Left Shoot Info: default (what is currently shown), information of ship's current target regardless of where cursor is currently (as if the cursor is always over the target)
  Reasoning for this: some players like to view the accuracy information without having to hover the cursor over the target, especially when hovering over a target pops up additional windows that do not need to be viewed at all times.
• Center Right Ammunition Window: default (what is currently shown), ammunition percentage instead of remaining shells
  Reasoning for this: easier to calculate if a ship has enough rounds to fight a battle if a player knows an average battle uses 30% of total ammunition instead of 876 rounds.

[madham82]

3 hours ago, MDHansen said:

 

Regards to this. I would really like an on/off command for this. I really don't like the RPG style damage numbers for 3 reasons; it doesn't look good, it clutters the UI, and finally, all those numbers are in the lower left column anyway.

The projectile tracers could maybe also have a separate command to turn on/off. I don't mind them too much, but in some occations it would be nice to turn off (BIG fleet battles)

I'd never disagree with giving users a choice over what to show. 

[Ribba]

8 hours ago, Zuikaku said:

It would be far more realistic if you don't se trajectory of every single shell... And no, it does not look good, it's like Star wars or Ben Hur naval battle.

If it's realism your after, you should sit on the bridge or in the conning tower of your flag ship, not using free look with birds eyes view. Or even more realistically. You should sit in your office and read battle reports to get see how the battles went.

But as everybody knows, this a game. And not a very realistic one either, as almost every other game made. Because as most other games who tries to give a realistic vibe to the player, they sacrifice realism for the UI, game mechanics and so on, to make the game more playable.

And having tracer is an important part of the UI. It tells the player a lot about how and what the enemy is targeting, and as so, the player can react accordingly. 

And I already know that you don't like the look of the tracers, and I respect your right to have your own opinion. But other than that, your opinion of the topic is of zero importance to me when it comes to my own opinion of the topic. I think it looks good, and I'm glad it's in the game both from an esthetic perspective as well as the UI aspect.

That said, I welcome an option to turn it on/off. But if or when such a feature arrives, I will leave it on.

[Urst]

2 hours ago, Ribba said:

If it's realism your after, you should sit on the bridge or in the conning tower of your flag ship, not using free look with birds eyes view. Or even more realistically. You should sit in your office and read battle reports to get see how the battles went.

But as everybody knows, this a game. And not a very realistic one either, as almost every other game made. Because as most other games who tries to give a realistic vibe to the player, they sacrifice realism for the UI, game mechanics and so on, to make the game more playable.

And having tracer is an important part of the UI. It tells the player a lot about how and what the enemy is targeting, and as so, the player can react accordingly. 

And I already know that you don't like the look of the tracers, and I respect your right to have your own opinion. But other than that, your opinion of the topic is of zero importance to me when it comes to my own opinion of the topic. I think it looks good, and I'm glad it's in the game both from an esthetic perspective as well as the UI aspect.

That said, I welcome an option to turn it on/off. But if or when such a feature arrives, I will leave it on.

I honestly would like it more if we got combat reports instead. Þe Radio Commander Vietnam game is amazing.

[Suribachi]

I am having some trouble with some of the vocabulary and mechanics explanations in the game.  If the goal of the developers is to bring in new players and retain old ones by refining the game, I believe that the following need to be cleared up.  At the very least as additions to the in game help.  

Special note: I understand that English may not be the first language of the developers or the person creating the UI.  I also recognize that what I am bringing up may be just translation issues from one language to another.  But again, I just want to point out what I think can make the game better.


Vocabulary:
"Ship Flaws" -- there are bonuses that state that they cut down on ship flaws by X%.  What does that mean?  Are we cutting down on the chance of ship flaws happening or the amount of effect the flaws have on the ship or both?
"Long Range" -- this is mentioned multiple times but gives no indication as to where the transition between short range and long range takes place.  Is it 10 km?  20 km?  50% of your main gun's maximum range?


Gun Types and Sizes
still a vocabulary issue, but long enough to warrant its own section.  In the tech tree, there is reference to main guns, large guns, naval guns, secondary guns, small guns, and casemate guns.  Of this list of 6 different guns, only 4 are well understood, which are main, secondary and casemate which also act as secondary guns and finally naval guns which are defined as 3 inches and higher.  This being said:
"Large guns" -- in the tech tree, under the Gun Layout section, there is reference to putting a certain number of large guns on the side of the ship without losing accuracy.  Players are confused as to whether this means the number of turrets or the number of individual guns within those turrets.  Example, 3x twin-barrel turrets; is this 6 guns or 3?  
"Small guns" -- same as large guns.  Additionally, when does a small gun become a large gun or a naval gun?  5 inch?  7 inch?  9 inch?

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, Suribachi said:

"Ship Flaws" -- there are bonuses that state that they cut down on ship flaws by X%.  What does that mean?  Are we cutting down on the chance of ship flaws happening or the amount of effect the flaws have on the ship or both?
"Long Range" -- this is mentioned multiple times but gives no indication as to where the transition between short range and long range takes place.  Is it 10 km?  20 km?  50% of your main gun's maximum range?
"Large guns" -- in the tech tree, under the Gun Layout section, there is reference to putting a certain number of large guns on the side of the ship without losing accuracy.  Players are confused as to whether this means the number of turrets or the number of individual guns within those turrets.  Example, 3x twin-barrel turrets; is this 6 guns or 3?  
"Small guns" -- same as large guns.  Additionally, when does a small gun become a large gun or a naval gun?  5 inch?  7 inch?  9 inch?

From the "params" file is 60% the base value of a ship being build with flaws. I am almost sure you are cutting down on the chance of ship flaws happening. It is possible to run a test by starting a new campaign in 1940 and build many ships. You will notice that the number of ships build with flaws are much less in comparison with a 1890 campaign. Still a better explanation would be great to avoid any issues with the players.

 

About long range from the "params" file, we have this:

long_range_start,-1500,"start range, where long-range starts to apply",10000,-1500,,,,,
long_range_end,48000,"end range, where and above long-range have full effect",20000,48000,,,,,

 

But the best way to see in game how it works is in a quick custom battle with the same ship.

18.1% long range at 2 km away.

 

131.9% at 24 km away.

The longer the distance, the higher will be the bonus to the long range.

 

From the "technologies" file, all mentions to big guns says it is 9" or higher.

[Suribachi]

50 minutes ago, o Barão said:

From the "params" file is 60% the base value of a ship being build with flaws. I am almost sure you are cutting down on the chance of ship flaws happening. It is possible to run a test by starting a new campaign in 1940 and build many ships. You will notice that the number of ships build with flaws are much less in comparison with a 1890 campaign. Still a better explanation would be great to avoid any issues with the players.

 

About long range from the "params" file, we have this:

long_range_start,-1500,"start range, where long-range starts to apply",10000,-1500,,,,,
long_range_end,48000,"end range, where and above long-range have full effect",20000,48000,,,,,

 

But the best way to see in game how it works is in a quick custom battle with the same ship.

18.1% long range at 2 km away.

 

131.9% at 24 km away.

The longer the distance, the higher will be the bonus to the long range.

 

From the "technologies" file, all mentions to big guns says it is 9" or higher.

This definitely explains how large guns are 9" and higher and how "long-range" bonuses start to come into effect at distances greater than 10km. 

However, as you have stated, you got that information from the game's parameters files, not from the in-game help.  My position is that it should be in-game since a player, especially a new player, will not necessarily have the patience or knowledge to go digging through the game files to find information that should already be available to them.

You did help me though and for that I am thankful.

[kineuhansen]

how open is the steam support going to be will we be able to build ships and place them on the steam for other players and also will we be able to balance the game amd how easy is the mods going to be installed

[Grandpa Canuck]

On 4/4/2023 at 10:11 AM, Nick Thomadis said:

We will offer the beta within this week, hopefully, without the new hulls but with the improved campaign loading times, the new weather visuals and various other. From then on we will update the beta frequently, until the patch becomes released fully stable.

Been 10 days, that's over a week. Can we have an updated ETA please.

[kineuhansen]

this is gamelaps updates are never on time i just would love to know why they stop making this game

[Zuikaku]

 I'm afraid this is going to be one last major update.

[Ribba]

Is there any way to modify the save game file and the relations between nations?

I'm at war, as I've been for a long time, against the British, French and the Spanish. But now that Italy has been resuscitated for N'th time, the next turn brings them at war with me, GB, France and Spain. So I'm forced into an alliance with those nation to fight the might Italian Navy, with their five ships and 5 million GDP (in 1932).

As mention, I've been at war against France and especially GB for a very long time, on and off of course since alliances changes regularly. But I don't want to lose all my VP against GB (almost 80k), France (almost 55k) and Spain (only 14k) again. I've had an extra save game so that I could reload if something horrible went wrong with the game, but every time reload the game and enter the next turn, I drag into an alliance. Sometimes I remain at war with France, but I always dragged into an alliance with GB, losing all my VPs.

So I've decided that if I cannot stop the alliance, I'm gonna end my 200 hours campaign. The forced alliances has become a game breaking bug for my part.

Edited April 14, 2023 by Ribba
Fixing some typos

[Panzergraf]

I had the same thing happen to me when France reemerged, which threw me into an alliance with everyone else.
Including USA, which I had just launched multiple naval invasions against (as Japan).

Now Germany (now also my ally) has taken all of France by way of land battles so they should hopefully never reemerge again, so my next enemy should be someone with an actual navy.

You should keep that older save file and hope the next patch fixes the absolute mess that is forced alliances (with enemies!)

[Suribachi]

2 hours ago, Ribba said:

Is there any way to modify the save game file and the relations between nations?

I'm at war, as I've been for a long time, against the British, French and the Spanish. But now that Italy has been resuscitated for N'th time, the next turn brings them at war with me, GB, France and Spain. So I'm forced into an alliance with those nation to fight the might Italian Navy, with their five ships and 5 million GDP (in 1932).

As mention, I've been at war against France and especially GB for a very long time, on and off of course since alliances changes regularly. But I don't want to lose all my VP against GB (almost 80k), France (almost 55k) and Spain (only 14k) again. I've had an extra save game so that I could reload if something horrible went wrong with the game, but every time reload the game and enter the next turn, I drag into an alliance. Sometimes I remain at war with France, but I always dragged into an alliance with GB, losing all my VPs.

So I've decided that if I cannot stop the alliance, I'm gonna end my 200 hours campaign. The forced alliances has become a game breaking bug for my part.

The alliance system has a very odd side effect every once awhile.

https://imgur.com/gallery/HRUan3t